#1 By: Mark Frauenfelder, August 9th, 2013 11:53
#2 By: Spocko, August 9th, 2013 12:47
I'm impressed by the ability of people to make short funny films. These are like black out sketches from improv or vaudeville. And some are playing with the stop start motion of the video.
But the funniest one to me was the kid which was not staged. No no no no no no.
Also, here is something that just cracks me up. That image in the center, I didn't notice it when I was watching the videos. Was it there as a vine or just selected as the one on display. It might have been just a frame, but I'm guessing that the use of a busty woman in a bikini increased the click rate by 20 percent at least. I'm sure there are google analytics that will tell us the details. Maybe for fun you could do that analysis. But up another collection of "Best of Vine" with out the hot Chick and see the click rate. You are still getting clicks for the funny, but you could see just how much hot chicks in bikinis drive traffic. .
#3 By: Reed James, August 9th, 2013 13:12
Everything on you-tube now has a cover image of a busty women with her tits falling out. They must be popular. I am pretty sure the one they used here isn't in the video even though there are lots of lovely ladies.
#4 By: Sean, August 9th, 2013 13:15
It's gotten so obnoxious, that I've taken to preferentially watching videos without a half-naked woman presenting her rear when wasting time on YouTube.
Apparently there's some trick to sticking those images in that then get presented on the thumbnail.
#5 By: Torn Paper Napkin, August 9th, 2013 13:42
I was fully expecting a chestburster parody.
#6 By: Eric Wagner, August 9th, 2013 13:58
Those were mostly fun. Except for, you know, the ones that were crimes.
#7 By: James Race, August 9th, 2013 14:09
"This video is no longer available due to a copyright claim...."
Those guys move fast.
#8 By: sam albright, August 9th, 2013 14:11
This. I was literally watching it when it stopped playing and showed the copyright error message.
The one where the girl climbs into a store display of beachballs - classic.
#9 By: Bruce Bordner, August 9th, 2013 14:22
What were those speakers was my only persisting thought - then I found them at Spencer's giftshop for $39.99. From the demo, they have the acoustic quality of a waterpipe. No, no link for you
Without scale, I saw a 12" woofer with a 4 foot water tank. I could build that.... naw, it's still stupid...right?
This may be the purest form of video. I always enjoyed the shortest parts of Monty Python.
#11 By: Bruce Bordner, August 9th, 2013 14:44
OK, this is a guess - maybe a lawyer can answer: is this copyright infringement because party X created a new video product containing copies of the original videos?
If so, has anyone produced a method of playing a series of videos seamlessly by a linked list of URLs? A URL "playlist"? There would seem to be a lot of applications for that, and it doesn't seem difficult...
On the other tentacle, is the "compilation video" now legal as a URL playlist? It should appear the same - and it could be sold as a valid new product in itself, couldn't it? Where is the "playlist" market? This is curation (in the museum sense) and I'd pay for it (if cheap), in music, video, or whatever. Saves me time and effort, right?
If this doesn't exist, then the details are left as an exercise for the student. I'll take a percentage. "Run, you clever boy - and remember me!"
#12 By: Jonathan Roberts, August 9th, 2013 15:20
I don't think it works any more, but YouTube used to just take the middle frame of the video. If you worked out which frame that was, you could change it to something unrelated to the video itself.
#13 By: Bruce Bordner, August 9th, 2013 15:21
Obviously, I don't use Youtube... of course they support video playlists. I just spent time trying to do it with VLC - I should get off my lawn.
Does a Youtube playlist of videos work seamlessly; is it legal; is it saleable; where are they?
#14 By: Jorpho, August 10th, 2013 21:26
Oh look, it came back, complete with the, ah, chestburster. I can post this, right?
I should add that it's actually kind of refreshing just how little of the content is dependent on cheap sex appeal. How ironic.
#15 By: Jeff Atwood, August 11th, 2013 02:02
This one from July 2013 is similarly great.
#16 By: Mark Frauenfelder, August 14th, 2013 11:53
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.